Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Question for Athiests and church bashers

Options
1…457910…21

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    Magic Beans
    Closed Accounts Posts: 329 ✭✭Magic Beans


    Downlinz wrote: »
    What does that say about your judgment on the intelligence of your parents, grandparents and other relatives who more than likely devoted so much of their lives to these causes? As a huge part of our society wouldn't it imply you believed they were gullible and naive people to live the way they did? Perhaps weak-willed to stand out from the crowd and question accepted truths?

    You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. - Abraham Lincoln


  • Options
    #183
    pragmatic1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,573 ✭✭✭pragmatic1


    marty1985 wrote: »
    If there were no religions - well, let's not get silly.

    Whats silly about that.


  • Options
    #184
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    aidan24326 wrote: »
    It's not lazy if you have indeed reasoned it through in your mind. BUT, to read the bible and arrive at the conclusion that it's all absolutely true requires some very very twisted reasoning. You won't agree with me on that of course.

    As far as I'm concerned you've revoked your right to call raah's post condescending if you yourself hold this equally condescending view about Christians. It was something I took incredibly seriously, and I came to the conclusion that it was significantly more reasonable to me than unbelief in any of its forms was.


  • Options
    #185
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    pragmatic1 wrote: »
    Sudan/France, Yemen/Germany, Iran/Finland, Mauritania/Belgium, etc.

    Same applies. You're selecting countries which are most convenient for your argument. I have quite the choice to do this the other way if I desire.


  • Options
    #186
    pragmatic1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,573 ✭✭✭pragmatic1


    philologos wrote: »
    Same applies. You're selecting countries which are most convenient for your argument. I have quite the choice to do this the other way if I desire.
    Go on.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    marty1985
    Registered Users Posts: 788 ✭✭✭marty1985


    pragmatic1 wrote: »
    marty1985 wrote: »
    If there were no religions - well, let's not get silly.

    Whats silly about that.

    Unless you can go out and convince all the Hindus and Muslims and Jews and Christians and Buddhists etc to abandon their beliefs and not pass them on to their descendants, it's not going to happen, so I'm not going to entertain the notion that eternal and unanswered questions about life and the nature of existence and reality are going to be forgotten about.


  • Options
    #188
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    pragmatic1: I would if I got the point of what you were arguing. I'm certainly not arguing that my views should rule the State, I'd rather if they didn't. Christianity was never intended to be used for ruling States. It's to be used in a grassroots movement rather than a top-down situation.


  • Options
    #189
    gbee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,388 ✭✭✭gbee


    Personally I resent my parent's for bringing me up a ROMAN Catholic. I feel my struggle with religion has held me back and it's nearly impossible to shrug off.

    But I really feel bitter more for them allowing the abuse to proceed, they knew and still cowtowed to the priest and the Bishop was like God himself.

    My best rebellion was when I was about 12 and running to the shop for the latest edition of the Dandy and the noon Angeles tolled, everyone dropped to their feet, even a delivery van driver got out and knelt down and a old man, I remember him looking like 90 grabbed by hand to force me to kneel.

    I pulled away uttering what an eeejet he was.


  • Options
    #190
    Krusader
    Registered Users Posts: 4,057 ✭✭✭Krusader


    Ideology is the new religion, well in the west in any ways.


  • Options
    #191
    pragmatic1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,573 ✭✭✭pragmatic1


    marty1985 wrote: »
    Unless you can go out and convince all the Hindus and Muslims and Jews and Christians and Buddhists etc to abandon their beliefs and not pass them on to their descendants, it's not going to happen, so I'm not going to entertain the notion that eternal and unanswered questions about life and the nature of existence and reality are going to be forgotten about.
    I dont need to. It'll happen organically.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    hairybowsie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35 ✭hairybowsie


    Take out the is there an afterlife and debates about sex etc and you and look at the gospels and what jesus preaches about social justice, love, judging people like mary magdelene,. Look at all the wisdom in other religions. Religion 2.0 needed. Laughable some of the comments here equating non belief with intelligence.


  • Options
    #193
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    hairybowsie wrote: »
    Take out the is there an afterlife and debates about sex etc and you and look at the gospels and what jesus preaches about social justice, love, judging people like mary magdelene,. Look at all the wisdom in other religions. Religion 2.0 needed. Laughable some of the comments here equating non belief with intelligence.

    Why can't one appreciate Jesus' teaching as a whole rather than shoehorning sections out of it?


  • Options
    #194
    pragmatic1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,573 ✭✭✭pragmatic1


    philologos wrote: »
    pragmatic1: I would if I got the point of what you were arguing.

    If you didnt get the point I was arguing, why did you feel compelled to reply with an answer that supported your opposing view. Come on now.
    I'm certainly not arguing that my views should rule the State, I'd rather if they didn't. Christianity was never intended to be used for ruling States. It's to be used in a grassroots movement rather than a top-down situation.

    Not to sure about that. It has a nack of becoming intertwined with the state.


  • Options
    #195
    pragmatic1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,573 ✭✭✭pragmatic1


    hairybowsie wrote: »
    Take out the is there an afterlife and debates about sex etc and you and look at the gospels and what jesus preaches about social justice, love, judging people like mary magdelene,. Look at all the wisdom in other religions. Religion 2.0 needed. Laughable some of the comments here equating non belief with intelligence.
    Thats called being empathetic to other people. It doesnt require religion.


  • Options
    #196
    gbee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,388 ✭✭✭gbee


    philologos wrote: »
    Why can't one appreciate Jesus' teaching as a whole rather than shoehorning sections out of it?

    Actually, I think Jesus is cool, his basic philosophy was sound.

    The problem is that religion was taken my brutal men to enslave others, the very Catholic Religion itself is not even from Jesus it was created by the dying Roman Empire and given the name Roman to distinguish it from other churches at the time.


  • Options
    #197
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Downlinz wrote: »
    If you believe the church is corrupt + power hungry and that god isn't real.

    What does that say about your judgment on the intelligence of your parents, grandparents and other relatives who more than likely devoted so much of their lives to these causes?

    Very little.

    The fact is there are quite a number of diverse reasons people think there is a god. Not all of them are connected with intelligence. In fact some of the most intelligent people are religious too.

    Even the most intelligent people can be wrong. Just look at Newton, one of histories most celebrated intellects. Do a short bit of reading however and you will find he was convinced by the most ridiculous notions at times.

    Even the most intelligent people on the planet can be fooled by some of the reasons that people think there is a god. From childhood indoctrination, to confirmation bias, to wishful thinking, to fear of death, to simply being lied to.

    I think you will find the number of atheists that think religious people are by definition stupid or naive therefore is very small.
    philologos wrote: »
    Why is compartmentalisation necessary? - Personally, I think belief in God is simply reasonable

    And yet every time you are asked to explain your reasoning you run a mile making me wonder if it is as reasonable as you think it is.... or even if YOU think it is as reasonable as you claim you do.
    philologos wrote: »
    Monty Burnz: I don't see how my belief in God adversely affects my perception of reality.

    Well it seems to make you think that very common things are in fact very rare for one as I explained in this link.


  • Options
    #198
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    pragmatic1 wrote: »
    Not to sure about that. It has a nack of becoming intertwined with the state.

    Any human institution does, but ultimately Christianity Biblically seems to be something separate to the State. I think it is better that way in that I think that people should choose of their free will to become Christians, and it is up to us as Christians rather than the State to promote our beliefs.

    I don't think there is any value in forcing someone to claim that they believe that Jesus is Lord. I do claim that there is value in helping someone to see what Christianity is about and people deciding for themselves truly to follow Jesus as Lord. In this case, the latter case is going to provide for a much more sincere belief, the former is going to provide resentment.


  • Options
    #199
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    philologos wrote: »
    I don't expect you to believe that Christianity is true.

    I am entirely unsurprised given you (or anyone else for that matter) have evr given one reason to think it is. I don't expect anyone to believe it either, yet it appears they do.
    philologos wrote: »
    As for proof. Proof lies only in the realm of mathematics. What one should be discussing is probabilities.

    Indeed. Yet even when someone does not ask you for proof you STILL cant give anything. I have asked, for example, for any arguments, data, evidence OR reasons to think the idea there is a god contains even a MODICUM of credence.

    What do we get from you in reply? Nothing. So forget anything as lofty as "proof". You have NOTHING to support the claim at all. Usually when asked to give stuff however you just run away.
    philologos wrote: »
    I don't believe that Christianity is devoid of reason either.

    Then adumbrate the reasoning. So far you have not. You just SAY over and over again it is reasonable.... obviously hoping that if you SAY it often enough it might start being true.
    philologos wrote: »
    It's absolute nonsense that I haven't subjected my beliefs to scrutiny

    No it isn't! You literally run from scrutiny when it happens!!!!!
    philologos wrote: »
    LOL. Depends on how you pick your examples.

    North Korea (state atheism)

    A canard you have been corrected on time and time again yet you dishonestly keep using it. They are told in NK that the birds sang in korean the day the dear leader came to power. They are told he is an "eternal leader" who still leads them after his death while his son is a semi reincarnation of him, part of him, part of the whole (sound familiar Trinity boy? The great leader and his son the dear leader ring any bells?).

    If you think this is atheism, then your continued inability to understand atheism is more than clear. The entire state of NK is a theocracy in every way.

    Of course you have been corrected on this innumerable times, but I guess it serves your ends to ignore that and keep telling people this lie. Every time you are cornered about your lack of evidence, your lack of reasoning, you play this canard as your "change the subject and get out of jail free" card.

    Which just makes THIS post by you even funnier....
    philologos wrote: »
    Same applies. You're selecting countries which are most convenient for your argument.

    .... pot and kettle meet again it seems!


  • Options
    #200
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    pragmatic1 wrote: »
    Thats called being empathetic to other people. It doesnt require religion.

    I think it goes beyond empathy in many respects. Christianity doesn't just say if you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours. Christianity encourages people to love and respect those who hate them. That's hard. It also encourages people to do good not only to those who do good to them, but also who do profound evil. It encourages people to forgive those who do what is evil to them, irrespective as to what that evil happens to be. It demands humility rather than boasting.

    I can't honestly say that I've seen the Christian message entirely paralleled in a secular context.

    I also can honestly say that many Christians (myself included) have failed to live by this example that they are given Biblically. It is something definitely to strive for.


  • Options
    #201
    hairybowsie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35 ✭hairybowsie


    pragmatic1 wrote: »
    Thats called being empathetic to other people. It doesnt require religion.

    Maybe. But it also doesn't require atheism either whose sole purpose doesn't address anything positive imo. I.e the whole afterlife debate is a red herring. Religion in its best guise is a true opponent to greed and social unjustice. Empathy is not strong enough on its own.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    philologos wrote: »
    Christianity encourages people to love and respect those who hate them. It also encourages people to do good not only to those who do good to them, but also who do profound evil. It encourages people to forgive those who do what is evil to them, irrespective as to what that evil happens to be. It demands humility rather than boasting.

    So what do people think who love you as they watch you going around wasting your love energy on those who hate you and them?

    Would you try to invest your love and respect in a peson who raped your child? What would your child think of you for doling out love to such a person after carrying out such a dispicable act?


  • Options
    #203
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    philologos wrote: »
    It encourages people to forgive those who do what is evil to them, irrespective as to what that evil happens to be. It demands humility rather than boasting.

    I can't honestly say that I've seen the Christian message entirely paralleled in a secular context.
    hairybowsie wrote: »
    Maybe. But it also doesn't require atheism either whose sole purpose doesn't address anything positive imo. I.e the whole afterlife debate is a red herring. Religion in its best guise is a true opponent to greed and social unjustice. Empathy is not strong enough on its own.

    None of these things require religion, nor does religion do any of them.

    All these things are perfectly attainable in the absence of religion. What religion has managed to do however is become very good at taking credit for a lot of it by proxy.

    As yet I have been shown a single "moral good" that has ever been done in the name of religion that could not have been just as easily attained in the absence of religion. Religion therefore appears to be entirely superfluous to requirements.

    The opposite is not true however as I have seen many things "bad" happen that likely would not have happened in the absence of religion. The recent stories for example of the parents who watched their own daughter die of a very treatable variety of Diabetes because they were taught the treatment was against gods will and plan springs to mind. It is a pernicious system of thought indeed that can warp a parents love for their own child enough to make them think watching them die of a treatable ailment is in any way a "good" thing to do.

    Nor... it should be pointed out... would it say a single thing about the truth of religion even if it WAS somehow not superfluous to requirements. Even if the false claim was true that religion causes people to do "good" this would in no way at all substantiate any of the truth claims religion makes.

    No, what religion does is to take the good we aspire to do as a species and somehow claim that religion helps that, fuels it, causes it or even objectively grounds it so that the concept of doing "good" may be attainable outside religion but without religion it is baseless. The religious like to claim even the non religious can do good, but doing that good makes no sense without an objective deity to ground morality in.

    So yes, empathy IS enough on it's own. Do not let religion teach you otherwise. Religion is just trying to be the packaging on an otherwise perfectly serviceable product.


  • Options
    #204
    pragmatic1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,573 ✭✭✭pragmatic1


    philologos wrote: »
    I think it goes beyond empathy in many respects.Christianity doesn't just say if you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours. Christianity encourages people to love and respect those who hate them.

    That quote was a reply to another poster who argued that the good aspects of different religions should be amalgamated to form a religion 2.0. It wasnt directed at christianity.
    That's hard. It also encourages people to do good not only to those who do good to them, but also who do profound evil. It encourages people to forgive those who do what is evil to them, irrespective as to what that evil happens to be.

    Non-resistence to evil. Very dangerous territory and actually immoral in my opinion.
    It demands humility rather than boasting.

    Christians believe that they are the children of the creator of the universe and he has a specific plan for them. Nor really humility.
    I can't honestly say that I've seen the Christian message entirely paralleled in a secular context.

    Nor have I. It would be a crazy world if it was.
    I also can honestly say that many Christians (myself included) have failed to live by this example that they are given Biblically. It is something definitely to strive for.

    Of course not. Its an impossible task full of contradictions.


  • Options
    #205
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    pragmatic1 wrote: »
    Non-resistence to evil. Very dangerous territory and actually immoral in my opinion.

    Who says that it means non-resistance to evil? Jesus encouraged to face justice if they are guilty of a crime, to put things right with others before going to perform religious rituals, and indeed if you are a guilty of a crime to pay your fine in full. Forgiveness doesn't have to do with forgoing justice, but rather in not dwelling on wrongdoing. I think that's a liberating idea, but a profoundly difficult one at the same time.
    pragmatic1 wrote: »
    Christians believe that they are the children of the creator of the universe and he has a specific plan for them. Nor really humility.

    That doesn't really sound arrogant to me if one considers that God created all things in creation. I don't consider myself better or worse than any individual on the face of the earth. Ultimately I have very little to boast of, but I have a lot to give thanks for, particularly if we believe that the earth is His and everything in it.
    pragmatic1 wrote: »
    Nor have I. It would be a crazy world if it was.

    I guess that's where we differ. I honestly believe that if more people strived to live by Christian principles that the world would be a significantly better place to live in.
    pragmatic1 wrote: »
    Of course not. Its an impossible task full of contradictions.

    Explain this more?


  • Options
    #206
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    philologos wrote: »
    I can't honestly say that I've seen the Christian message entirely paralleled in a secular context.
    Immanuel Kant
    David Hume
    Adam Smith
    Francis Hutcheson
    Bertrand Russel
    Thomas Nagel
    And on and on

    These philosophers, religious and non-religious, all provided arguments in favour of the "Christian" message in a purely secular context. In fact you'll be hard pressed to find a philosopher who promotes the "Christian message" as the "Christian message" because A) it's not just a Christian message (Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews and Atheists all promote the same thing), B) presenting it as a Christian message doesn't allow for much debate or discussion on the matter and C) OTG doesn't promote this "Christian message".

    Only Christians call it a "Christian message", everyone else calls it common decency.


  • Options
    #207
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    So what do people think who love you as they watch you going around wasting your love energy on those who hate you and them?

    Would you try to invest your love and respect in a peson who raped your child? What would your child think of you for doling out love to such a person after carrying out such a dispicable act?

    I've never been in such a situation, particularly given that I don't have children.
    I can't imagine how painful that would be for any given person and no doubt it would take a long time to get through that.

    I do believe that Christianity inspires people to forgive some of the most grievous things. That isn't going to happen immediately of course, but it will take time. I ultimately think that peoples lives can be completely transformed, particularly in respect to how the Christian gospel can work in peoples lives. I've seen it a good bit in my own case and in the case of others.

    Seachmall: I don't think Kant does what Christ does. Indeed, even if he did if you read his Groundworks For The Metaphysics Of Morals that his theory is actually inspired in part by Christian (mainly Reformed) ideas. I think Christianity goes further in that it encourages self-sacrifice rather than mere empathy.


  • Options
    #208
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    philologos wrote: »
    I guess that's where we differ. I honestly believe that if more people strived to live by Christian principles that the world would be a significantly better place to live in.

    Some of the principles anyway. I would not say all.

    However the point still stands that there is not one "good" Christian principle on offer that requires you to believe anything on insufficient evidence in order to support and/or follow.

    All your religion is doing is creating a lot of lies, such as the existence of god, and then tacking those lies onto moral precepts most people would agree with and strive for.

    The canard there is to make people think "Well I agree with all THAT stuff.... so the rest must be true too".

    Truth by proxy really is a pernicious and dangerous trick. It is also damaging in that it causes people to have conversations about real world morality based on what each of them thinks an invisible most likely non-existent deity wants.... rather than grounding discussion on real world morality IN the real world, on real world facts.

    The parents who watched their child die because of a JW belief in medical intervention being against god's plan did not have a morality grounded in the real world, and an innocent child suffered and died because of it.


  • Options
    #209
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    The more I think about it the more creepy it becomes.

    'Love and respect thine abuser child'.

    What kind of screwed up message is that to be giving a child?


  • Options
    #210
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    philologos wrote: »
    I think Christianity goes further in that it encourages self-sacrifice rather than mere empathy.
    True, however you can't argue that that opinion is in anyway exclusive to Christianity. There are countless religions that promote self-sacrifice, hell there is even evolutionary theories to explain why we accept self-sacrifice as a good thing.

    Christianity does not promote good behaviour any more than any of the other major religions or humanist philosophies, nor does being a Christian make you a good person in and of itself.

    What you view as a Christian message Muslims view as an Islamic message, Jews view as a Jewish message and biologists view as instinctive behaviour. Christianity does not hold a moral high ground.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    What kind of screwed up message is that to be giving a child?

    It depends on your views of the purpose of justice. Is prison just for the sake of punishment, or is it also for the rehabilitation of criminals? I honestly believe that people, even if they have carried out the most grievous acts can turn their lives around they should be given a second chance.

    Of course I'm sure my position would be put under considerable strain if I was put under a situation as you describe.


Advertisement